Decoding pharma value.
EbiCap turns thousands of trial, benefit, disease, and capital events into a moving evidence map you can inspect.A moving evidence map for pharma value and accountability.
1,987
pharma companies mapped
361,970
clinical trials linked
$87.3B
2026 R&D spend tracked
92.2%
current HTA sample low benefit
Capital allocation
The money map
Evidence stack
Ingest
Trials, approvals, assessments, filings, payouts
Normalize
Companies, drugs, diseases, decisions, and capital events become one graph
Score
Impact, neglect, evidence quality, and allocation signals update continuously
Alert
New clinical or financial signals surface as live investigation leads
Burden vs effort
91 high-unmet diseases
Ischaemic heart disease
193M
Lower respiratory infections
98.7M
Tuberculosis
43.6M
Pancreatic cancer
12.3M
What you are seeing
Dots become evidence. Evidence becomes a decision.
The homepage now stays at the level most visitors need first: what EbiCap connects, why it matters, and where to go next. The dense scoring logic lives in methodology.
Start with a question
Is this company creating patient value?
Search a sponsor, therapy, or disease area. EbiCap begins with the decision a human is trying to make, not with a wall of raw tables.
Watch evidence connect
Trials, benefit ratings, burden, and capital become one trail.
The graph links clinical evidence to the money behind it, so a score can be inspected instead of merely trusted.
Act on the signal
The output is a ranked, explainable impact view.
Use it for diligence, policy review, portfolio monitoring, or an investigation that needs sources attached.
The first read
Four numbers. One question.
EbiCap should be readable before it is comprehensive. These are the headline signals; the detailed trail is one click deeper.
How to use it
Choose the door that matches your work.
01
Investors
Compare companies by evidence quality, benefit, incentives, and capital discipline.
Explore rankings02
Policy teams
See where disease burden and research effort diverge before the gap becomes invisible.
View disease gaps03
Investigations
Follow a sponsor from trial evidence to approvals, settlements, payouts, and score.
Start investigationPlatform output
Less dashboard. More answer.
The interface should help a visitor understand the product before asking them to decode every model component.
Read the full scoring methodImpact score
A single comparable readout, backed by linked sources.
Red flags
Low-benefit exposure, weak trial evidence, or poor capital alignment.
Evidence trail
A dossier that shows why the signal exists.
Capital allocation
Follow the money to the evidence.
A capital story is only useful when it stays legible. The detail below is a preview, not the whole methodology.
Allocation model
Therapeutic value versus capital return
$87.3B
R&D mapped
tracked against benefit and burden signals
$55.6B
Low-benefit exposure
allocated to no/minimal improvement assets
21.4
Missed breakthroughs
estimated opportunity-cost equivalent
160M
Healthy-life cost
QALY years not gained in the model
Breakthrough / novel
$31.7BNo / minimal improvement
$55.6BBuybacks
$20.7BDividends
$12.3BCountry lens
Patient value becomes comparable.
The model converts misallocated effort into a country-adjusted healthy-life estimate, then ties the estimate back to the underlying disease and drug evidence.
Life expectancy
77.5
years at birth
Change since 2018
-1.4
years
Misallocation cost
2.6
months per person
Want the assumptions, weights, public sources, and scoring caveats? That belongs in methodology, where readers can go deep without making the homepage unreadable.
Open methodologyPlatform access
Bring the evidence graph into your workflow.
Guided access covers company rankings, disease gap analysis, HTA evidence, capital allocation, and exportable investigation trails.
Coverage
1800+ companies, clinical trials, HTA records, filings, payments
Use cases
Investment diligence, policy analysis, portfolio reviews, investigations
Output
Rankings, red flags, methodology notes, exportable evidence trails
Demo requests are reviewed manually so access can match the organisation, use case, and evidence depth required.